Monday, February 12 2007   -   In the Media

September 11 conspiracies will go mainstream on Sunday as BBC airs an hour long documentary (article below) that investigates the growing number of conspiracy theories surrounding the 9/11 attacks.

9/11: The Conspiracy Files, will try to answer the question that has been doing the rounds on the Internet ever since the hijacked planes crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center: "Is it an inside job?"

According to the BBC, investigators have travelled across the United States speaking to eyewitnesses trying to separate fact from fiction.

The programme produced by Guy Smith raises another important question: "Why was America so unprepared when terror attack warnings had been received?"

According to a Scripps Howard poll, 36% of 1,010 Americans believe that the government is responsible for the attacks either by omission or by commission.

The official 9/11 commission report concluded that "there were specific points of vulnerability in the plot and opportunities to disrupt it.

 

Sunday, February 11 2007   -   In the Media

Program Details

Special: Truth, Lies and the Press - Part 1
Length: 2:00
Type of program: Documentary

Upcoming Airtimes, February 10th through March 10th: Schedule here

 

Friday, February 9 2007   -   In the Media

Normally, we'd throw caution to the wind, copyright-wise, and reprint an article like this in its entirety, but this particular issue is, thus far, for paying CounterPunch subscribers. We urge you to email or call Counterpunch to see about purchasing this single issue, as it will be a valuable part of any 9/11 library. Meanwhile, we bring you some important chunks.

The running of this story shows how, as the tonnage of evidence begins to weigh on people's minds, the media is creeping into covering the serious 9/11 questions. Many who have publically derided the "truth movement" — like Counterpunch co-editor Alexander Cockburn — now deliver the goods on back roads, or with pretexts that trump their previous diatribes. Had the focus of Christopher Ketcham's article been on Pakistani, rather than Israeli, involvement with 9/11, one has to wonder if CounterPunch would have run it.

 

Tuesday, January 2 2007   -   In the Media

Over the years we've heard from a few educated people who claim to understand and support the latest story given by the US government for the unprecedented destruction of the WTC buildings. Unfortunately, those folks usually turn out to either work for the Bush Administration directly, like FEMA and NIST, or are in some other way profiting from the War on Terror. Some people accept what these Bush scientists say because they have PhDs in scientific fields, or because certain media sources promote the official myths. In a way, the curious behavior of these scientists and media sources allows us to better see the predicament we all face.  

Saturday, December 16 2006   -   In the Media

Counterpunch co-editor Alexander Cockburn set the tone of these pieces with an article describing theologian and ethicist David Ray Griffin, the author of The New Pearl Harbor (2004) and of The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (2005), as a "high priest" of the "conspiracy nuts" whom Cockburn denounces as cultists who "disdain all answers but their own," who "seize on coincidences and force them into sequences they deem to be logical and significant," and who "pounce on imagined clues in documents and photos, [".] contemptuously brush[ing] aside" evidence that contradicts their own "whimsical" treatment of "eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence."

It's a characteristically forceful performance, if at times slipshod. (One small sign of carelessness may be the manner in which Cockburn slides from calling 9/11 skeptics a "coven" to comparing them, a few sentences later, to "mad Inquisitors ["] torturing the data—as the old joke goes about economists—until the data confess." Readers brought up to think that the victims and perpetrators of witch-crazes have not customarily been the same people may find this unintentionally amusing.)

 

Friday, December 15 2006   -   In the Media

Over the years people have become increasingly skeptical of official accounts regarding historic events. After the Kennedy assassination everything changed. It is not so much a question of conspiracy theorists using the smallest margin of doubt to support their theories, but rather the increasing loss in prestige of major instutions, and the effect this has had on their credibility. 9/11 is the perfect example of a historic event whose detailed analysis from several different angles produces conclusions different from the official ones. In Spain, there is skepticism over the Madrid bombings of 3/11; in the U.S. - and in the rest of the world - there is skepticism over 9/11.  

Wednesday, December 13 2006   -   In the Media

If we ever find the time, perhaps we should conduct a group analysis of the hit pieces emanating from the intellectual/academic left against the '9/11 Truth Movement'. Among other similarities, they each exhibit a noteworthy "dual consciousness." In a 1997 interview, the great 20th century sociologist Pierre Bourdieu used the phrase to refer to the mindset of media professionals who publicly deny the insidious workings of the invisible structures of corporate broadcasting - masking it even from themselves to an extent; all the while they take advantage of the media tool at their disposal and denounce their critics, claiming they have uncovered nothing which hasn't been known for ages about the media.  

Wednesday, November 29 2006   -   In the Media

 

Tuesday, November 14 2006   -   In the Media

...Republican rule in the 21st century has devastated American civil liberties and American prestige and leadership capability. Can Democrats restore American liberties and leadership, or will a lust for power corrupt them, too, and cause Democrats to retain the police state powers Bush has created?

 

Tuesday, October 31 2006   -   In the Media

Backers hail 9/11 theorist's speech
By Michael Riley
Denver Post Staff Writer

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4572518

The standing ovation has finally died down, and Steven E. Jones, a soft-spoken physics professor, finds himself pinned against the stage by some of the enthusiastic fans who packed a University of Denver auditorium over the weekend to see him.

A man with a "Got truth?" T-shirt offers Jones a careful explanation for why the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center were operated by remote control. Another quizzes him about the size of the footprint of the Pentagon crash - too small, he says, for the Boeing 757 that "officially" smashed into it on Sept. 11, 2001.

"Can I just shake your hand?" a woman in a baggy red sweater asks Jones. "You're doing such important work."

 

Sunday, October 15 2006   -   In the Media

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research
October 14, 2006

Abstract: - Many adults in the United States believe the current federal government has not been completely forthcoming on the issue of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to a poll by the New York Times and CBS News. 53 per cent of respondents think the Bush administration is hiding something, and 28 per cent believe it is lying.